Lawson et al v. 15th Judicial Drug Task Force et al
| Capri Lawson, D. G., C. S. and Joshua Kleinhans |
| 15th Judicial Drug Task Force, Mike Thompson, Charles Hopper, Christopher Michael Jenkins, Brandon Gooch, Steve Babcock, Smith County, Tennessee, Hartsville/Trousdale County Government, Tennessee, Smith County Sheriff's Department and Trousdale County Sheriff's Department |
| 3:2013cv00418 |
| May 2, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| John S. Bryant |
| Kevin H. Sharp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
123
ORDER: The Report and Recommendation 117 is ACCEPTED and APPROVED. Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment 85 , 88 , and 100 areGRANTED. All other pending motions 72 are TERMINATED AS MOOT. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 1/8/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
117
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Defendants have filed three motions for summary judgment that are currently pending in this case (Docket Entry Nos. 85 , 88 and 100 ). Plaintiff Capri Lawson, who is deemed to be proceeding pro se following the with drawal of her counsel, has not responded in opposition. For the reasons stated below, the undersigned Magistrate Judge recommends that these three motions for summary judgment be granted and that the complaint be dismissed Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 12/23/15. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(afs)
|
|
Filing
54
ORDER granting 53 Motion for Discovery Conference. Telephone Conference is scheduled for February 19, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 2/12/2015. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(ds)
|
|
Filing
50
REVISED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: The Jury Trial is set for 1/5/2016 at 9:00 AM and the Pretrial Conference is set for 12/21/2015 at 1:30 PM before District Judge Kevin H. Sharp. Motions to Amend due by 2/1/2015. Discovery due by 4/1/2015. Disposit ive Motions due by 8/15/2014. Counsel should read the order in its entirety for all other deadlines and information. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 8/6/2014. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER granting 46 Motion to Ascertain Status of Case 46 is Granted. Counsel shall confer and file by June 20, 2014, a proposed revised case management order that will apply to both of these cases. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 6/12/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER: Motion to Consolidate Cases 25 is GRANTED and this case is hereby consolidated with Casey Lawson, v. 15th Judicial Task Force, et al, Case No. 3:13-0420, for discovery and case management purposes only. The parties may file an additional motion to consolidate the trial following the completion ofdiscovery. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 6/13/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
